Re: Should we have rpm package policies tying extension packages to the GNOME versions they'll work with?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 03:30:32PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Please no! Unless you want to break Rawhide users. The upstream
> versioning is already quite hostile.

... but it seems even more hostile to have users' desktops break on upgrades
because of incompatible extensions we've packaged into the distro.

My hope is that there'd be coordination when the newer gnome-shell lands,
and the maintainers of these packages (and possible newer co-maintainers
too) would test and update (possibly even just with a local metadata.json
patch if the extension works unchanged). What's happening now is that no one
notices that they need attention. Especially for some of the more obscure
ones that happen to be included.

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux